Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"?

[Judy Taylor]

On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 06:44:48 -0600 "Bill Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: It was tongue in cheek, DaveH -- ironic, too, since I'm one of the few here who could say it that way.   So you wrote "Any parent who would not send their wicked son to the damnation of hell would be a wicked parent."  And how is this "tongue in cheek?" To me it sounds like another slam at DavidM?   Oh, and the Paul Hill twist is interesting. We're to consign our wicked children to hell's damnation, but Paul Hill was taking vengeance into his own hands while doing the same to a wicked abortionist -- and that is wrong. Hmmm.    Yes it is wrong to bomb someone else's property and shoot physicians.  Where have you been?  Doesn't your doctrine of the "incarnation" include this physician and the others who work at these Clinics?    Sin has always been a big deal to God, it incurs His wrath and it spreads so stoning a rebellious son was supposed to keep it in check when Israel operated as a theocracy.  Under the New Covenant in Christ God does not require us to literally stone the rebellious until they are physically dead - but lawlessness and rebellion will cause spiritual death with the result that they will be just as cut off from the assembley and will not inherit God's Kingdom.   Today we are dealing with a spiritual separation and hopefully, like the Prodigal they will have time to repent ... (remember the brother Paul turned over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh - with the hope that he would repent before the Day of the Lord?).   It seems to me that "Christians" want to talk tough and sound righteous -- but do nothing, and this so the blood will be on their Lord's hands. Bill    Who is saying "do nothing?"  We should be doing righteousness while allowing God to be God in our own lives as well as in the lives of others ...  judyt       From: Dave Hansen    DAVEH:   Wow!   I've been rebuked for something prior to actually reading the original post for which my presumed thoughts are found less than charitable.   Hmmmmmm........OK Bill.  However, I'm not sure if you said it tongue in cheek, or if you really meant what you said in a serious note.     As I now ponder those words (written by DavidM???).......... "Any parent who would not send their wicked son to the damnation of hell would be a wicked parent." ...........it now occurs to me (thank you Bill for bringing this to my attention) that DavidM is probably TT's most prominent example of a Christian eager to condemn a person to eternal torture.  Before any TTers get their noses bent out of shape, let me explain.      DavidM has several times mentioned that he believes we should be administering capitol punishment for those who break the Mosaic laws that require capitol retribution.  (Correct me if I've misunderstood your position on this, DavidM, or if I am putting words in your mouth.)  For example, in the case of adultery, DavidM would prefer a punishment of stoning, which would then cause the offending person to depart on their journey to hell prematurely (than if they had died of natural causes years hence.)  I doubt there would be any other TTers who would share DavidM's enthusiasm (if that is the proper word) for such strict and harsh judgments.  Conclusion....Is not DavidM more eager than other TTers to see to it (via execution) that some sinners are sent to hell for transgressing?     So.......in a post conclusion, those Christians (who are described as wicked parents) who do not feel compelled to carry out a righteous judgment that speeds one off to a hellish physical eternal torture are less eager to consign the enemies of God to hell than righteous Christians.  Isn't that the kind of thinking that got Paul Hill in trouble?      That brings up another question....What do you think of Paul Hill, DavidM?  Do you see him as a Christian doing the Lord's will, or do you see him as a misguided Christian nut case?     Is my logic on this flawed?  And please note....I'm just thinking out loud on this.  I'm not accusing anybody of anything, nor am I trying to be offensive.  I'm just exploring a line of thought using a couple of real world examples. Bill Taylor wrote: DaveH wrote  >  So I'm not sure why any TTers would take exception when I suggest that there are Christians who are eager for people to be consigned to the burning torture of hell.  What have I said that is in error?     David Miller responds   >  Speaking for myself, I took exception primarily with the idea that some on TruthTalk have this perspective.      "Any parent who would not send their wicked son to the damnation of hell would be a wicked parent."    Maybe DaveH reads words like these and infers from them an eagerness on the part of certain Christians to consign others to the burning damnation of hell.   Shame on you DaveH for being so presumptuous.   Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: David Miller To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 9:38 AM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Narrow way not " loving"? DaveH wrote: > So I'm not sure why any TTers would take > exception when I suggest that there are Christians > who are eager for people to be consigned to the > burning torture of hell.  What have I said that is > in error?     Speaking for myself, I took exception primarily with the idea that some on TruthTalk have this perspective.    DaveH wrote: > I really don't think it is a rare occurrence to hear professed > Christians say such things.  And, I'd be very surprised if you > do think it is rare.   Yes, it does seem rare to me.  I'm not sure I can ever remember a believer ever saying such a thing.  I have heard believers many times warning others that they will burn in hell if they do not repent, but I'm not sure if I have ever heard a believer tell somebody that they HOPE they burn in hell.   Peace be with you. David Miller. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.